Question: Prince Henry, Duke of Gloucester as king?

Why didn't Prince Henry, Duke of Gloucester become king when George VI died? By everything that I know, as the next male in succession, George V's third son should have become king after the first abdicated and the second died.

The type of succession that you are referring to is called agnatic primogeniture. Inheritance according to the seniority of birth amongst the of sons of a monarch.

King George V had five sons. Prince Edward (future King Edward VIII), Prince Albert (future King George VI), Prince Henry, Duke of Gloucester, Prince George, Duke of Kent and Prince John, who died as a child. After King George V's death, in 1936 and King Edward VIII's abdication in 1937, the next son came to the throne as King George VI. In 1937, at the start of King George VI's reign, the first four places in the line of succession were occupied by Princess Elizabeth, Princess Margaret, Prince Henry, Duke of Gloucester and Prince George, Duke of Kent.

The succession to the British throne is by male preference primogeniture. Males have precedence over females, however if there is a female she is not excluded. Because of this, King George VI's elder daughter, Princess Elizabeth became the sovereign and not Prince Henry. If the King died without children, then Prince Henry would have become king in 1952 because he was next in line. If this had occurred then after King Henry IX's death in 1974, his son, Prince Richard, Duke of Gloucester would be king, possibly reigning as King Richard IV.

It is interesting to note that had King Edward VIII not abdicated and not had children, the succession would likely look as it does today. The only difference is that the present Queen would have come to the throne upon the death of her uncle in 1972 instead of 1952 when her father died.

© Marilyn Braun 2011

Question: King Edward VIII Commemorative items

I have a souvenir tumbler for the coronation of Edward VIII, 12th May 1937. The design seems to be a transfer, with a portrait of the King and a wreath of thistles and roses with the crown at the top. Not interested in selling it, just wondered how common souvenir items of the coronation which did not take place are, are they sought after?

Doing a quick search of Edward VIII coronation souvenirs comes up with a large amount of items. From busts, glassware, medallions, china, stamps, biscuit boxes, handkerchiefs, and even to commemorative coins. Items commemorating the Coronation that never was are by no means rare.

Producing these items would not be unusual and given the amount of time between his accession and his abdication there was plenty of time to prepare them, meaning it wasn't a last minute or limited production. Companies offering these items could not have anticipated the abdication crisis so there was no reason to hold back on making them in large quantities.

I'm not an expert on royal souvenirs - I just like to collect them! Only a dealer can give you an answer regarding it's value to a collector. On eBay, the prices for these items vary greatly and sellers can ask whatever price they choose. Because of this I'm inclined to say that any item related to the brief reign of Edward VIII  is only as valuable as what someone is willing to pay for it.

© Marilyn Braun 2010

Question: Royalty Marrying Commoners

From Kate's biography it looks like she is a commoner. Does this not negate William's chances of being King. Can Charles even become king being married to Camilla. I was under the impression that the princesses had to be of royal blood.

There is no stipulation that members of the royal family need marry other royals. When Prince William marries Kate Middleton it will have no effect whatsoever on  his chances of becoming king. Prince Charles' position as second-in-line is also unaffected by his 2005 second marriage to Camilla Parker Bowles.

In Queen Victoria's day, at one point it was out of the question for members of the royal family to marry beneath their rank and station. If a royal did so they risked banishment. If they held military rank they could be stripped of that as well. Such marriages were called morganatic, whereby the lesser-ranking spouse and any children they may have, did not share the royal titles or any inheritances that go with it. However, the Queen was an ardent matchmaker and could turn a blind-eye to royal status when it suited her to do so.

One example of this is the marriage of Queen Mary and King George V. Queen Mary's (then Princess May of Teck) father was the product of a morganatic marriage. While both her parents held royal titles, Princess May was a mere Serene Highness as opposed to a Royal Highness, thus making her not royal enough to marry royalty, but too royal to marry a commoner. Queen Victoria bypassed this issue and allowed her to marry her grandson, the future King George V. Given that no one would think of Queen Mary as anything less than royal now, it's rather ironic that she wasn't considered royal enough at the time.

As royal houses fell during the First World War there was a shortage of eligible princes/princesses. For practical purposes royalty started looking towards the aristocracy for spouses. This is still an option however it seems as though members of the royal family are choosing to marry for love and compatibility as opposed to trying to make alliances between royal or aristocratic houses.

Like the Crown Princes of Denmark, the Netherlands, Norway, and even the Crown Princess of Sweden, Prince William has chosen a commoner for a spouse. And like them, his (and Prince Charles') position in line to the throne is completely unaffected by it.

© Marilyn Braun 2010

Question: The Christening of Victoria, The Princess Royal Painting

My grandfather has a beautiful painting of Queen' Victoria's christening (1841) and born in 1840. I am trying to find a list of people who attended the event so I can pin point who is in the painting.

Royal Collection Trust / © Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II 2016

The painting that your grandfather has is a reproduction of a work called The Christening of Victoria, The Princess Royal by Charles Robert Leslie. The original, an oil on canvas measuring 129.5 x 182.9 cm, is in The Royal Collection.

The Princess, who was born on November 21, 1840, was christened on her parent's first wedding anniversary, February 10, 1841. The christening robe that she wears is made from Honiton lace and white satin and was worn by all royal babies until 2008, when it was retired due to its age and fragile state. The baptismal lily font was commissioned by Queen Victoria. Made of Silver gilt, and measuring by height 43 cm; and diameter 43 cm, it is one of only two silver English fonts. The font is in the shape of a water lily, supporting a large shell. Inside the rim of the small shell were water lilies floating around the edge and water was specially brought from the River Jordan. The lilies were considered to represent purity and water lilies were associated with new life. This font has been used at all royal christenings since 1841.

Princess Victoria was christened in the Throne Room at Buckingham Palace by William Howley, Archbishop of Canterbury. Her godparents were Leopold, King of the Belgians, Ernst I (her paternal grandfather), he was not present during the event and the Duke of Wellington stood proxy. The other godparents were Prince Augustus, Duke of Sussex (her great-uncle), Dowager Queen Adelaide, widow of King William IV, the Duchess of Gloucester (her great-aunt), and the Duchess of Kent (her grandmother).

The painting commemorating the event depicts, The Dowager Queen Adelaide on the left of the font, who named the child Victoria Adelaide Mary Louisa. Others in the painting include the Duchesses of Gloucester and Kent, King Leopold I of the Belgians, and the Duke of Sussex (all in the group on the left). Queen Victoria and Prince Albert are on the right of the font.
© Marilyn Braun 2010

Question: Does Prince Charles own a yacht?

I read a news article that said prince charles and camilla rented a yacht to travel thru the caribbean some time ago but also read an article that said president bill clinton was on ' prince charles yacht in 1992 for Rio conference on enviromental protection '. so I was wondering if he owns a yacht or just rents one from time to time?

As far as I'm aware, Prince Charles does not own a yacht. The Royal Family did, at one point, have the use of the Royal Yacht Britannia to entertain dignitaries over the years including Sir Winston Churchill, Rajiv Ghandi, Nelson Mandela, Bill Clinton, Boris Yeltsin, Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher. This yacht was decommissioned in 1997.

Prince Charles has chartered or been lent the use of a yacht in the past. In 1991 he was loaned the Alexandros by Greek shipping magnate John Latsis. This was for a reported 'second honeymoon' with his then wife, Diana Princess of Wales. He also used the yacht in 2002 for a cruise with Camilla Parker Bowles. In 2008 he chartered one of the most expensive private yachts, the £50 million, 245ft Leander from car parks tycoon Sir Donald Gosling for an official tour of the Carribean Islands. The first time since the Royal Yacht Britannia was scrapped in 1997 that a member of the Royal Family has hired a private vessel for an official overseas visit.

According to Clarence House, the Prince of Wales chartered the yacht not for reasons of comfort but but to minimize his carbon footprint. If you're going to be environmentally friendly, might as well do it in style.

© Marilyn Braun 2010

Question: The Queen's Personal Flag

Last week on television I caught a brief glimpse of old footage of the Royal Family on the balcony at Buckingham Palace, under the balcony was a large banner with Royal Insignia. The banner was blue and it had various insignia, mostly round, and it looked like the banner was in embroidery and goldwork. Do you know anything about this banner?

It sounds like you're referring to the Personal Flag of Queen Elizabeth II. This particular flag was created in 1960, It was flown for the first time on the BOAC Britannia in which she landed at Delhi airport on January 21, 1961. The personal flag consists of the initial 'E' ensigned with the Royal crown, surrounded by a chaplet of roses. The design is in gold (or yellow) on a blue field and the flag is fringed with gold (or yellow).

The Queen has standards for her various realms. The Royal Standard, which is flown whenever she is in residence at one of her Royal palaces, her car on official journeys and her aircraft - when on the ground. The Royal standard represents not only the Sovereign but also the United Kingdom. Her personal flag is meant to symbolize her as an individual instead of associating her with her role as sovereign of any commonwealth realm.  This is personal to her alone and cannot be flown by any other individual. Her personal flag is flown from any building, ship, car or aircraft in which she is staying or travelling.

Although it is not a 'Head of Commonwealth' flag, it has become The Queen's personal Commonwealth flag. A number of Commonwealth countries have adopted their own version of the flag, incorporated to include the country's arms, to be flown as a personal flag when the Queen is visiting their country. Canada's version is at right. It is also flown in non-monarchial Commonwealth countries that have not adopted a personal flag specifically for the Queen.

The design has been adapted - for instance, during her Golden Jubilee celebrations in 2002, a version appeared as a banner on Buckingham Palace (see below). In this case it incorporated the Commonwealth symbol and circles with symbols from her various realms. A fine tribute from the Head of the Commonwealth.




© Marilyn Braun 2010

Question: Prince William's Cloak

During his recent tour of New Zealand, Prince William was photographed wearing a cloak with feathers. Can you tell me the significance of it?

The cloak that Prince William is wearing is made from kiwi feathers called a korowai. It is also referred to as a kahu kiwi - the most prestigious form of kahu huruhuru (feather cloak). Kiwi's are the national symbol of New Zealand and the feathers are particularly important to the Maori, who traditionally believe that they are under the protection of the Tane Mahuta, god of the forest. The feathers are used for ceremonial cloaks, which denote status, identifying the owner as a chief or someone of great prestige and position. It is a gift granted only to people of high rank and is highly prized as a family and personal heirloom. Some believe that the cloak becomes empowered by the mana (status) of its owner and the mana increases when it is worn.

© Marilyn Braun 2010

Question: Courtesy titles

If the daughter of a duke or marquess or earl who bore the courtesy title "Lady Mary Smith," married Mr. John Jones who was subsequently knighted by the Queen, would she continued to be called "Lady Mary Jones" or would she be called "Lady Jones" by virtue of her husband's being Sir John Jones?

With courtesy titles there is a difference between those who possess the title birth and those who acquire it by marriage.

I will offer Lady Helen Windsor as an example. As the daughter of the Duke of Kent, she is entitled to the courtesy title of 'Lady'. When she married Timothy Taylor, she took his surname and became Lady Helen Taylor. Now if Timothy Taylor were to receive a knighthood, she would still be Lady Helen Taylor because her courtesy title as the daughter of a Duke, outranks her husband's knighthood.

Another example would be the late Diana, Princess of Wales' sister, Lady Jane Fellowes. When she was born, her father was Viscount Althorp and she was known as The Honorable Cynthia Jane Spencer. Upon her father becoming Earl Spencer in 1975, she became The Lady Cynthia Jane Spencer (though she prefers to use her middle name). When she married, she took her husband's surname and became Lady Jane Fellowes. Her husband, Robert Fellowes, was knighted, but this did not change her title, as the daughter of an Earl, this again outranked his knighthood.

However, in 1999, Sir Robert Fellowes was granted a Life Peerage and became Baron Fellowes, of Shotesham in the County of Norfolk. When this happened Lady Jane took the style Baroness Fellowes, or more informally Lady Fellowes, which, believe it or not, is actually a demotion as Baron is the lowest rank of the peerage and Lady Jane is the daughter of an Earl - one of the top three peerages.

Now, in the reverse, when the husband is given a knighthood, the wife is entitled to be known as Lady (husband's surname). An example of this would be Paul McCartney. When he was knighted, his wife took the courtesy title Lady McCartney - at the time this was Heather Mills McCartney. She could not be known as Lady Heather McCartney because she took the title from her husband instead of her father. Unlike Lady Helen Taylor, who takes the title from her father instead of her husband.

© Marilyn Braun 2009

Question: Charles and Camilla's poppies

I have noticed in many pictures of Charles and Camilla that they are both wearing two poppies. Is this a royal thing? Does it mean something special?

Since Charles and Camilla first arrived in Canada on most public appearances they have worn two poppies. This has been the subject of a great deal of curiosity. Why the two poppies? What does it mean?

The two poppies that the couple are wearing are the British paper version and the Canadian one. The design of the Canadian poppy consists of petals made of red plastic with a felt lining and black centre held on by a pin. The British paper version is sold by the Royal British Legion through their annual Poppy Appeal. Some have suggested that by wearing the two poppies they are making a symbolic gesture of support for British and Canadian veterans.

Poppies became a symbol of Rememberance after the poem In Flanders Field commemorated the flower. It was written in 1915 by a Canadian doctor named John McCrae after he witnessed the death of a friend. During the funeral McCrae noticed wild poppies blooming between the graves and this inspired his famous poem. After its publication it became the most popular poem of the First World War. In part because of its popularity, the poppy was adopted as the Flower of Remembrance for the war dead of Britain, France, the United States, Canada and other Commonwealth countries.

© Marilyn Braun 2009

Question: The Windsor name

How far does the name Windsor go back? Does that apply to all of the Kings and Queens until there where no last names at all?

The Windsor name goes back to 1917. Prior to that point members of the royal family did not have a surname but the name of the house or dynasty which they belonged.

At the time King George V was head of the House of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha dynasty. During the First World War, in reaction to anti-German sentiment, the King changed the name from the German sounding Saxe-Coburg-Gotha to Windsor; chosen after the ancient castle of the same name. This change applied to both the Royal House and as a surname for his family should one be required.

This change was made official at a meeting of the Privy Council on July 17, 1917. The King declared that 'all descendants in the male line of Queen Victoria, who are subjects of these realms, other than female descendants who marry or who have married, shall bear the name of Windsor'. This surname is used by all male and unmarried female descendants of King George V. For instance: Lord Frederick Windsor, Lady Gabriella Windsor, Lord Nicholas Windsor.

© Marilyn Braun 2009

Question: Does the Queen wear wigs?

I say QE II has worn wigs in public for many decades. Have you talked about this in your blog? My sister says she wears expensive wigs . Michael Fagan said he saw her wigs on her makeup table. Can you verify this? I would appreciate your
insight. I say she wears wigs and does so as a convenience.

In all of the books I've read about her, I don't think I've ever heard about her wearing wigs. I'm going to have to say no, I don't think that the Queen wears wigs. Yes, when Michael Fagan broke into the Queen's bedroom in 1982 there were reports that he had seen a wig. The Sun, a tabloid newspaper, reportedly paid his wife, Christine for the rights to her story. Amongst the tantalizing revelations, the Queen wore a shortie nightgown and had the figure of a 16 year old. Viewing photos of her circa 1982, can you picture her owning either?

The Queen has had the same hairstyle, with some slight variations, for the last eighty years. Towards the end of the 1940's, when it was almost to her shoulders, was the longest length she wore it. In the 1950's she had the petalled pin-curl style, fashionable at the time. In the 1960's it resembled a football helmet circa 1938 and she has more or less stuck with this particular look since then.

Unlike her late sister, Princess Margaret, the Queen has never experimented with her looks. She's never worn elaborate updos or changed the color and she seems blessed with hair that hasn't thinned as she has gotten older. When it started to go gray in the late 1980's she stopped dying it altogether. Like her mother and grandmother, the Queen has had the same ubiqitious style - handy for keeping the look of stamps and currency consistent. The only instance of false hair I can find is that her grandmother, Queen Mary, as a young woman, wore an artificial fringe attached to the front hairline called a 'bang'.

She has used the same hairstylist, Ian Carmichael, for the last 11 years. If she wears wigs then only her hairdresser knows for sure.

© Marilyn Braun 2009

Question: Title of Queen

Would Camilla attain the title if Charles ascends to the throne? Would Diana have attained this title if she were still Charles wife? Who would ascend to the throne following Charles death?

At the time of their wedding in 2005 there was a lot of controversy over what Camilla's title would be upon her marriage to Charles. Legally she is entitled to be called Princess of Wales but because the title is so associated with Diana, decided to take the title Duchess of Cornwall instead. When Charles becomes king the official line is that she will be known as H.R.H. The Princess Consort. Legally she would be Queen but Camilla reportedly does not want the title of Queen. This move might also be to placate members of the public who would be against her being known as Queen Camilla.

Had Diana lived, and still been married to Charles, she would have become Queen Diana in due course.

Next in line to the throne following Charles' death would be his elder son Prince William. Should something happen to William then the next in line would become monarch - Prince Harry.

© Marilyn Braun 2009

Question: Prince William and Prince Harry - Peace Makers?

I was thinking about the recent (media) strife HRH William & HRH Harry have gotten in & how their family prefers them challenging their efforts in defense forces, & as a hypothetical was wondering how possible (if they wanted 2) either of the Princes "taking" U.S. president Barack Obama place in The Israeli–Palestinian peace talks?

No, it's unlikely that either Prince William or Prince Harry would be able to, as you say, 'take the place' of President Obama in these talks.

The main reason for this is that as they are members of the British royal family; they cannot do anything to make the monarch look partial to a particular side. The Queen has to be strictly neutral. By remaining so, the Queen provides a sense of stability and continuity in times of political and social changes. Members of the royal family support the Queen, which is the reason why you don't see any member of the family involved in politics.

In regards to Prince's William and Harry's involvement in the defense forces, they are following a long-standing tradition within the family. At one point, a military career for princes was seen as the best possible occupation for them. However, this training would not, in any way, make them qualified to involve themselves in these types of discussions. Also, with their recent actions in the media - landing helicopters in their girlfriend's backyard, or in Harry's case - wearing pink nail-polish and being photographed in a wig and a bra - it doesn't instill confidence in any abilities they might have given the opportunity. In my opinion I feel safer leaving these issues to the professionals.

© Marilyn Braun 2009

Related article

Royal Military Service

Question: How can Charles be king?

How can Charles become king? You say his marital status does not matter, nor whom he marries (unless she is a Roman Catholic). But then, why did Edward have to abdicate when he wed Wallis Simpson?

Yes it does seem rather unfair that Charles was allowed to marry Camilla and Edward had to abdicate to marry Wallis Simpson. But putting aside all of the legal, moral and religious issues, the one main reason is that times are different. It would be interesting to see how Edward and Wallis' relationship would be handled nowadays. There seems to be one common denominator between the two couples: Divorce. Unlike now, it wasn't as common back in 1936 and there was a stigma attached to it. Along with being divorced Wallis also had several strikes against her: She was married at the time, she was an American, she had a reputation, and she was a commoner. Her nationality and social standing would not be an issue now, but in 1936 they were considered strikes against her.

In fact, legally Edward could have married Wallis Simpson but this would have caused a constitutional crisis. Unlike Charles, the King faced formidable opposition, not just from his government but from the Dominions; all of whom felt that Wallis was not consort material. There was also the Church of England which did not recognize divorce nor remarriage of a person whose previous spouse was still alive. The Church also did not recognize her first divorce. Marrying her would have been in conflict with Edward's role as Supreme Governor of the Church of England. A morganatic marriage was proposed (a marriage is one in which the wife of the Sovereign and any children who may be born of the marriage, are denied any claim upon the Sovereign's status, rights or privileges. This would have required special legislation, which the government was not prepared to do. The King then had three options - reject the advice of his ministers (a course which he never contemplated), renounce Wallis (which he refused to do) or abdicate. Edward felt that he could not continue in his role as King without Wallis, so he chose to abdicate.

Like Edward, Charles viewed his relationship as non-negotiable. However, as mentioned, times had changed. Prince Charles’ previous wife had died so there was no bar to his marrying again. The Church recognized Camilla’s divorce on the grounds of adultery. The Church had also changed its position on divorce. Allowing for couples to be remarried in a civil ceremony. The couple also had the support of the royal family, the government, the Church of England. The Commonwealth realms did not pose any opposition to the union. There was also the factor that the couple obviously would not produce any children. It would have been interesting to see what the reaction would have been had there been no legitimate heir (Prince William). Despite times having changed, the attitude could have been different with the succession at stake.

© Marilyn Braun 2009

Question: The Duchess of Windsor's Engagement Ring

Hello, do you know anything about the engagement ring given to Wallis Simpson from Edward? I think is was an emerald but have never found a photograph of it.




Yes, it was an emerald ring. The ring itself is a rectangular step-cut emerald with cut-corners weighing 19.77 carats within a stylized leaf border set with brilliant-cut diamonds. It was purchased in 1936 from Cartier and originally had a platinum mount, inscribed: We are ours now 27 x 36. It was remounted in a gold setting by Cartier in 1958.


This is one image listed in the public domain. There are better photographs of the ring in various books, including: The Sotheby's auction catalogue: The Jewels of the Duchess of Windsor sold for the benefit of The Pasteur Institute. There is another book, with a similar title called The Jewels of The Duchess of Windsor by John Culme and Nicholas Rayner. Note that if you want to buy the auction catalogue it needs to have 'sold for the benefit of the Pasteur Institute' in the title. The book by Culme and Rayner is not the catalogue. Both books are well worth the price if you are interested in royal jewels.

Strand books in New York City sometimes has copies of these books, at affordable prices and shipping. I wouldn't go through Amazon or Alibris as they charge exorbitant prices for their rare books.

Also, if you're interested in all things relating to the Duke and Duchess you might want to check out the following website: The Duke and Duchess of Windsor Society.

I hope this has answered your question.

© Marilyn Braun 2009


Thank you for enjoying this article. If you use the information for research purposes, a link to credit the work I've put into writing it would be appreciated.

Related articles:

Question: The Duke and Duchess of Windsor's wedding rings

Royal Engagement Rings

Some Royal Questions and Answers

I love receiving royal questions and answering them. Some of them have inspired full articles, other times the questions only require a short answer. This is unfortunate since they are no less interesting. Sometimes I can't answer them, whether it's due to the scope or lack of expertise. In those cases I try to point the person in the right direction. I've decided to post some of the questions and answers. I hope you enjoy them.

Do you know the exact manufacturer and the name of Diana's wedding china that she chose?

As far as I can locate: Royal Worcester Evesham. You may want to confirm this with the General Trading Company where she was registered at the time of her wedding.

I have an item I'd like to sell [insert item description]. Can you tell me the value of it?

No. I'm not an expert on royal commemoratives. You may want to check with a local antique dealer who sells royal commemoratives, they might be able to assist. You could also try a search on eBay to see if someone is selling this item or one similar.

What do Prince Edward and Princess Sophie do? I have heard nothing about them for a long time in the media or blogs.

Any current information and activities of members of the royal family can be found by going to the official site: http://www.royal.gov.uk/

I have some royal ancestors/history in my family. Can you tell me more about this?

Lucky you! No, I can't help with this. You may want to check out a genealogist or possibly a royal historian, they might be able to help you.

I've seen pictures of certain jewellery (brooches, earrings, rings..) worn by Camilla/The Queen, can you tell me more about the them?

I've written a few articles about royal jewels and tiaras. While the Queen does wear familiar brooches, some of Camilla's jewels are new or have never been worn publicly(or we haven't paid attention until now). Some of the "newer" brooches the Queen has worn might have come from the collection of Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother or are redesigned older pieces. There are some very good books on royal jewels in general that you may find useful (see related links)There are also several threads on royal jewels at The Royal Forums (Scroll down). You might find your answer there.

Do you know where Kate Middleton is?

I wish I had that kind of insider information! Unfortunately I don't. For the best source of Kate updates go to The Kate Middleton Report - All Kate, all the time.

At what time did the British monarchy lose executive power over the United Kingdom? Why did this happen, and who was head of state at the time?

And

Has the roles of Princesses changed over time? (Are they considered more important today than they were yesterday?) What must a Princess do to gain popularity? Are there any qualities she should possess to win people’s hearts?

You know, there's nothing more satisfying that cracking open a book and doing your own homework...

© Marilyn Braun 2008

Related Articles:

Recommended Books: Royal Jewels
Jewels fit for a Queen
Question: The Queen's Pearls
Camilla's Tiara
Royal Focus: The Spencer Tiara

Question: Queen Victoria's Wedding Dress and Bouquet

Could you tell me more about Queen Victoria's wedding dress and bouquet?

Thank you very much for your question.

On her wedding day Queen Victoria wore a shoulder-free white satin court dress. The bodice had a low, round neck and edging the neckline were narrow rows of piping and the short, full sleeves gathered into double puffs. The fullness of the skirt was taken in at the waist in a series of deep forward-facing pleats. The skirt had a deep panel of Honiton lace at the front, chosen by Victoria to support the declining lace trade. A court train, made of the same silk satin, measured 6 years in length and had a border of orange blossom sprays matching the coronet of orange blossoms from which her veil was suspended. The choice of orange blossom is significant and somewhat prophetic. In the Mediterranean, it was a symbol of fertility; Queen Victoria would later have nine children. In China it was an emblem of purity, innocence, and chastity; bywords for the Victorian era.

Queen Victoria wanted her entire ensemble to be made of materials of British manufacture. Probably the most well known aspect of her dress is the honiton lace used for her veil and for the flounce. The design of the lace is attributed to Wiliam Dyce and a colleague at the Government School of Design in London. It took more than one hundred lace makers six months to make the exquisite lace and the pattern was destroyed so that it could never be copied. Of her five daughters only her youngest, Princess Beatrice, would get to wear it on her wedding day in 1885. The veil was amongst Queen Victoria's most prized possessions and she would eventually be buried with it.

Because her gown and veil were all in white, she is credited with helping to establish a custom of wearing white, which continues to this day. Previously royal brides had worn gold and silver colors in order to express their wealth. Commoners often wore dark colors in order to use their gowns for other special days. It is said that the simplicity of her dress would set a pattern for other royal wedding dresses - although looking at some of the wedding dresses that followed, I would disagree with that. Many royal wedding dresses have been quite elaborate with beautiful embroidery - hardly simple at all. If anything it would be 120 years later that simplicity would return with Princess Margaret's dress in 1960.

As for her bouquet, Queen Victoria carried a small posy made up solely of snowdrops (Prince Albert's favorite flower). It's somewhat unfortunate but I can only find one source for this information. In reference to bridal bouquets, there is a royal wedding tradition of brides including a sprig of myrtle in their bouquets. This bush was grown from a cutting brought from Coburg by Prince Albert. Sprigs have been included in the bouquets of all royal brides since the 1850s.

© Marilyn Braun 2008

Thank you for enjoying this article. If you use the information for research purposes, a link to credit the work I've put into writing it would be appreciated.

Sources:

Royal Wedding Dresses by Nigel Arch and Joanna Marschner. A Historic Royal Palaces publication.

Royal Weddings by Friederike Haedecke and Julia Melchior

Legendary Brides by Letita Baldrige

I Do: 100 Years of Wedding Fashion by Caroline Cox
Britain's Royal Brides by Josy Argy and Wendy Riches

Five Gold Rings - A Royal Wedding Souvenir Album - by Jane Roberts for Royal Collection Publications

Two Centuries of Royal Weddings by Christopher Warwick

Related Articles

Royal Weddings
Royal Wedding Dresses
Question: Princess Diana's Wedding Bouquet

© Marilyn Braun 2008

Question: The Duke and Duchess of Windsor's wedding rings

....I have not found, anywhere, any information on the wedding rings of the Duke and Duchess, and this is my query: Is there a photograph, or description of the rings – somewhere? Were the Duke and Duchess buried wearing the rings, or, were the rings auctioned at Sotheby’s with the Duchess’ jewelry (after her death)?

Thank you for your questions!

You're right, there doesn't seem to be a lot of photos of the wedding rings out there. But given the fabulous collection of jewels that the Duchess owned, this is not surprising. While there are some photos of her with a plain ring on her wedding finger, they're not close up. For the most part she seems to have been photographed with her engagement ring; a large flawless emerald cut from the size of a bird's egg that belonged to a Mogul Emperor. So while she might have worn her wedding ring everyday, the size of her engagement ring would have dwarfed it. Looking at wedding photos some of them show her wearing just the wedding ring. Incidentally, the gloves she wore for her wedding were designed to open on the ring finger of the left hand. In some photos during the Second World War, where she is contributing to the war effort, you can see her wearing just the wedding ring. Anything larger would have been inappropriate. Many photos show her wearing gloves so the rings would not be seen. She was said to be rather meticulous about her grooming and she had manicures everyday, but her hairdresser recalled: She hated her hands. She always sat with her hands between her knees trying to hide them. Interesting then that she wore such extravagantly large rings that drew attention to them.

In most books about her there is very little reference to the wedding rings. Considering the circumstances, that would have been a minor detail. One book refers to it as being made from gold mined from the Welsh hills with a platinum copy auctioned in 1987 at Sotheby's. There are several wedding rings listed in the Sotheby's sale: lot #142 lists a 'platinum wedding ring, English, 1937, inscribed 'Wallis 18-10-35 Your David 3-VI-37' the two dates commemorate when the Prince proposed and the date of their marriage. In lot #177 there are 'Four wedding rings, all inscribed'. In photos the Duke of Windsor wears two rings on the fifth finger of his left hand, which seems to be the place royal men wear their wedding rings. Why there are five wedding rings in the auction, and whether one of them would have belonged to the Duke of Windsor is anybody's guess. Maybe he was buried with his but I highly doubt it.

Unfortunately I cannot locate photos specifically of these rings. Your best bet would be to see if you can purchase the auction catalogue which is rare and depending on where you look, very expensive, Sotheby's The Jewels of the Duchess of Windsor sold for the benefit of the Pasteur Institute. Or The Jewels of the Duchess of Windsor, by John Culme and Nicholas Rayner, written after the auction and a more affordable option. You might find photographs there.

Update: Although it's an interesting book, The Jewels of the Duchess of Windsor by John Culme and Nicholas Rayner (written after the auction) does not have a photo of the wedding rings. Nor does the official auction catalogue.

Sources:

The Windsor Style by Suzy Menkes

The Royal Jewels by Suzy Menkes

Famous Jewelry Collectors by Stefano Papi & Alexandra Rhodes

The Windsor Years by Lord Kinross

Edward VIII - The Road to Abdication - by Frances Donaldson

The Secret Life of The Duchess of Windsor by Charles Higham

The Windsor Story by J. Bryan III and Charles J.V. Murphy

Related Articles:

Royal Engagement Rings

Jewels fit for a Queen

© Marilyn Braun 2008

Question: Court Mourning and Coronation planning

What is the mourning length the british government do have to wait when a monarch dies to crown the next king or queen? What are the steps to the next coronation please?

Thanks for your question.

There are four categories of mourning - general, court, service or family.

General Mourning: A period of mourning to be observed by the general public but nowadays usually restricted to the death of the Sovereign, lasting only a few days until the funeral. Formally adopted for other members of the royal family and sometimes lasting several weeks

Court Mourning. Observed by members of the Royal Family, Households of the Royal Family, The Queen's representatives both at home and abroad and their staffs. With instructions on dress codes and official and social engagements prescribed. But length of court mourning varies. In King George VI's case it lasted from his death, February 6th, 1952 until May 31, 1952.

Service mourning: Observed by the Armed Services on the death of the Sovereign

Family mourning Observed by the Royal Family and by Households of the royal family when in personal attendance only.

The length of mourning varies greatly. Queen Victoria practically made mourning into an art form, mourning her husband Prince Albert for 40 years. Mourning could go on for months, sometimes up to a year in the case of the death of a Sovereign, during which time the court would move through degrees of mourning (full to half-mourning) with strict provisions for appropriate attire and social engagements for both the royal court and for the public. At the time of Queen Victoria's death court mourning was prescribed to last until January 24, 1902. The public was directed to wear deep mourning until March 6th, 1901 and half-mourning until April 17, 1901.Nowadays the period is significantly reduced and the length of time for public mourning and appropriate attire is left up to the individual.

Funerals are arranged through the Lord Chamberlands office. Funerals of sovereigns are organized by the Earl Marshall who is also responsible for the Coronation arrangements. The coronation of the new Sovereign follows some months after his or her accession. The length of time vs the date of Coronation probably has more to do with the complex planning involved than with any particular period of mourning. Some examples of the length of time between accession and coronation are:

Queen Victoria: Acceded to the throne on June 20, 1837. Coronation held on June 28, 1838

King Edward VII : He became King upon the death of his mother, Queen Victoria on January 22, 1901. His Coronation was planned for June 26, 1902 but postponed to August 9, 1902 following an attack of appendicitis which required an emergency operation.

King George V: Date of accession May 6, 1910. Coronation June 22, 1911

King Edward VIII succeed to the throne on January 20, 1936. He abdicated while his coronation was being planned. The date for this was May 12, 1937. Upon his abdication on December 11, 1936, his younger brother became King George VI. Instead of postponing the coronation, the date was kept the same.

Queen Elizabeth II - Date of accession February 6, 1952. Date of Coronation June 2, 1953.

Examples of current length of royal mourning. Queen Elizabeth, the Queen Mother died on March 30th, 2002. Her funeral on was on April 9th and members of the royal family observed mourning until April 19th. Her daughter, Princess Margaret, died on February 9th 2002 and mourning was observed from that date to the day of her funeral February 15, 2002.

As for the preparation surrounding coronations, the official site is your best resource.

For more information on Coronations, you might find the following book useful: Coronation: From the 8th to the 21st Century by Roy Strong

Thanks again for your question

© Marilyn Braun 2008

Question: Princess Diana's wedding bouquet

Do you happen to know how much Princess Diana's wedding bouquet weighed? My sister had an exact replica of her bouquet for her wedding. I was only 13 at the time but i recall it being extremely heavy.

Thank you for your question.

The wedding bouquet that Diana, Princess of Wales carried for her wedding in 1981 was made by Longmans Florists, who also designed and made the bouquet for the Queen when she married in 1947. The bouquet was a gift from the Worshipful Company of Gardeners.

The bouquet, 42" long and 15" wide, was of a cascading shower design similar to those from Edwardian times. It set a trend for wedding bouquets which up to that point at been comparably small. The designers of her wedding dress, David and Elizabeth Emanuel wanted Diana to have a large bouquet, as a small one would have obviously been dwarfed by the size of her dress. The flowers that comprised the bouquet were:

Gardenias
Stephanotis
Freesia
Odontoglossum Orchid (Royal Wedding)
Lily of the Valley
Earl Mountbatten Roses
Hedera (Ivy)
Tradescantia
Myrtle
Veronica (Hebe)

It's worth noting that it is a royal wedding tradition for a sprig of myrtle, from the bush grown from the original myrtle in Queen Victoria's wedding bouquet, to be included. The Earl of Mountbatten roses were a tribute to Prince Charles' "Uncle Dickie" Lord Louis Mountbatten, who had died in 1979. The yellow color of the rose incidentally inspired the bridesmaid dresses.

Three bouquets were made, one for the practice the night before the wedding, the second was delivered to St. James' Palace. The third was taken to Buckingham Palace on the day of the wedding and used for the formal photographs. As per royal wedding tradition, at least one of them would have been placed after the wedding on the tomb of the Unknown Warrior in Westminster Abbey.

Unfortunately, the Longman family sold their business a few years ago so there's no way to ask them about the specific weight. But according to the press release for the wedding bouquet: 'It is well balanced,and although heavier than most carried nowadays the distribution should not be too tiresome for the Bride.'

Whatever the weight, lets hope there was no bouquet toss; she could have seriously injured someone in the process!

Update: I was able to find out the information on the weight of the bouquet. It weighed approximately between 2-3 kilo's. Thank you to Yoko Hansen for providing this info!

© Marilyn Braun 2008

Thank you for enjoying this article. If you use the information for research purposes, a link to credit the work I've put into writing it would be appreciated.

Bouquet Information Source:

A Dress for Diana by David Emanuel and Elizabeth Emanuel

Related article:

Royal Weddings